Large Format/"Premium" Theaters (IMAX 15/70, Digital IMAX, XD, ETX, RPX, etc.)

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Poya

Well, it was shot in real IMAX, so it worked for that format. Other than that, Dolby is the way to go.

I personally hate what Dolby did to the former Tyson's ETX screen - until they fix a flaw that was a result of the upgrade - I won't go back. (and the fact that even as a brand new theater, AMC and Dolby could and should have installed the 3D system for 'The Jungle Book')

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by antovolk

The cropping of sides to 1.9 is what they were referring to I assume.

Ah yes, no actual references were made to any given ratio, the ASC reply was just "it'll be cropped to fit IMAX" which could well mean 1.90 in general, seeing as that's how they're proceeding with any new IMAX installs. Good catch, and it makes a LOT more sense to crop 1.90 from a 2.11 sensor so 42041 will be pleased with that re: oversampling etc.

To go back to that point about 1.43 I think its days are well and truly numbered unless someone actually shoots on IMAX 65mm. Still, it makes me wonder if IMAX are even going to bother with reverse anamorphic glass for the 4K laser projectors just so they can show 1.43 stuff. That's gonna be some expensive damn optics just for a handful of movies and documentaries at a comparative handful of venues (vs 1.90 digital/laser IMAX venues).

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Ah yes, no actual references were made to any given ratio, the ASC reply was just "it'll be cropped to fit IMAX" which could well mean 1.90 in general, seeing as that's how they're proceeding with any new IMAX installs. Good catch, and it makes a LOT more sense to crop 1.90 from a 2.11 sensor so 42041 will be pleased with that re: oversampling etc.

To go back to that point about 1.43 I think its days are well and truly numbered unless someone actually shoots on IMAX 65mm. Still, it makes me wonder if IMAX are even going to bother with reverse anamorphic glass for the 4K laser projectors just so they can show 1.43 stuff. That's gonna be some expensive damn optics just for a handful of movies and documentaries at a comparative handful of venues (vs 1.90 digital/laser IMAX venues).

but most museums / science centers etc., their screens are set 4:3 - I doubt very few are going to resize their screens to 1.90 - they might as well just have the image letterboxed. Most if not all IMAX 15/70 shot features will be transferred to IMAX-laser DCP's to keep the originals at their intended aspect ratios. I'd be curious to know what the ratio of 4:3 IMAX screens to 1.90 IMAX-Digital screens are - I'd assume there are more of the former than the commercial reduced screens that AMC/Regal etc have.

[Dubstar]

just a little head's up for those in the Washington DC area - the Smithsonian's National Mall Air & Space museum's IMAX screen is doing a 'Sci-Fi Sundays' series, this month:

May 1: Spaceballs
May 8: The Fifth Element
May 15: Men in Black

at 4:15pm

'Fifth Element' in laser ?! - yes please

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

but most museums / science centers etc., their screens are set 4:3 - I doubt very few are going to resize their screens to 1.90 - they might as well just have the image letterboxed. Most if not all IMAX 15/70 shot features will be transferred to IMAX-laser DCP's to keep the originals at their intended aspect ratios. I'd be curious to know what the ratio of 4:3 IMAX screens to 1.90 IMAX-Digital screens are - I'd assume there are more of the former than the commercial reduced screens that AMC/Regal etc have.

If I remember correctly, at the height of 15/70 there were around 175 theaters, split between institution sites like museums, and multiplexes in AMC/Regals etc, and more than half were domestic sites.

But now, I think they have around 400 domestic IMAX locations and 900 worldwide, so the majority would be digital 1.9 sites (not sure if there is even a single IMAX film site in China, which has become a huge country for the format, though they are working on laser locations for there).

[Geoff D]

Yep, that's what I meant above: LieMAX screens are now in the majority. And dubby, I'm not saying that 1.43 venues will have their screens resized as such (if IMAX truly are winding down 1.43 exhibition in general), they'll just show 1.90 DCPs instead. Speaking of which, has anyone here actually seen a true 1.43 show on 4K laser at 1.43 venue yet? Wouldn't surprise me if IMAX are dragging out the 1.43 conversion process so that people just kinda forget that it was all supposed to be 1.43 in the first place.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yep, that's what I meant above: LieMAX screens are now in the majority. And dubby, I'm not saying that 1.43 venues will have their screens resized as such (if IMAX truly are winding down 1.43 exhibition in general), they'll just show 1.90 DCPs instead. Speaking of which, has anyone here actually seen a true 1.43 show on 4K laser at 1.43 venue yet? Wouldn't surprise me if IMAX are dragging out the 1.43 conversion process so that people just kinda forget that it was all supposed to be 1.43 in the first place.

Force Awakens at the Metreon was true and glorious 1.43 laser in the IMAX shot sequence.
The former 15/70 sites which played Batman v Superman in laser would also be 1.43 in the IMAX sequences.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I personally hate what Dolby did to the former Tyson's ETX screen - until they fix a flaw that was a result of the upgrade - I won't go back.

And that flaw is...?

[imdobe]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Speaking of which, has anyone here actually seen a true 1.43 show on 4K laser at 1.43 venue yet? Wouldn't surprise me if IMAX are dragging out the 1.43 conversion process so that people just kinda forget that it was all supposed to be 1.43 in the first place.

Yeah, I've seen the new National Parks Adventure documentary which was filmed on 15/70mm in a 1.43 IMAX with laser. Looked absolutely gorgeous! And it filled the whole 1.43 screen.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

And that flaw is...?

because the screen is now closer to the floor, the red lighting on the stairs and wall bounce back onto the screen, which are visible in the bottom corners during dark scenes - for a film that is so dark (Batman vs. Superman) it's apparent and annoying.

[Zhorik]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

because the screen is now closer to the floor, the red lighting on the stairs and wall bounce back onto the screen, which are visible in the bottom corners during dark scenes - for a film that is so dark (Batman vs. Superman) it's apparent and annoying.

The lights sound like safety requirement and wouldn't change.

[antovolk]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

why Snyder is promoting Dolby Cinema when there are select scenes shot and projected in full frame IMAX is just backasswards

I saw this in both DC and IMAX-laser, the latter was the best it looked and sounded. (sorry Snyder).

Just that - promotion.

He said when introducing the London IMAX premiere that 1.43 2D - be it laser or 15/70 - is "the way I want you to see it"

[dvdmike]

So this shows how digital IMAX matters not for image quality changes (cap)

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by antovolk

Just that - promotion.

He said when introducing the London IMAX premiere that 1.43 2D - be it laser or 15/70 - is "the way I want you to see it"

And here's Favreau about Jungle Book
"As much as we want people to see it in IMAX, in 3D, most of the time you're going to see this at home"

I'm sure he likes the Dolby Cinema version of the film as well, and maybe stresses IMAX as the way he'd like the film to be seen because that's much more widely available than Dolby Cinema (particularly in the 3D format which seems to be what he prefers for Jungle Book). But sounds like he is very happy if people seek out his film in IMAX.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/jon-...#ixzz46pMzisrH

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Zhorik

The lights sound like safety requirement and wouldn't change.

True but they could be dimmed furthur

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

And here's Favreau about Jungle Book
"As much as we want people to see it in IMAX, in 3D, most of the time you're going to see this at home"

I'm sure he likes the Dolby Cinema version of the film as well, and maybe stresses IMAX as the way he'd like the film to be seen because that's much more widely available than Dolby Cinema (particularly in the 3D format which seems to be what he prefers for Jungle Book). But sounds like he is very happy if people seek out his film in IMAX.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/jon-...#ixzz46pMzisrH

IMAX in both digital and laser have brighter luminance - too many standard 3D theaters are scattershot when it comes to the necessary brightness for 3D to be seen properly

[UFAlien]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I'd be curious to know what the ratio of 4:3 IMAX screens to 1.90 IMAX-Digital screens are - I'd assume there are more of the former than the commercial reduced screens that AMC/Regal etc have.

It's a bit murky but I can hopefully provide some perspective. While admittedly a (very large) sample and not a complete accounting, of the 150-plus North American IMAX screens that LFE has measurements for, only 25.8% are full-height (1.43:1 or narrower). An additional 32.9% were "in between" b with ratios ranging from 1.44:1 to 1.67:1.

Full Frame or Narrower (1.17:1 - 1.43:1): 25.8%
Close to Full Frame (1.44:1 - 1.66:1): 28.9%
Close to Digital Width (1.67:1 - 1.89:1): 31.4%
Full Digital Width or Wider (1.90:1 - 2.17:1): 13.9%

Or simply, 54.7% are closer to 15/70 ratio, while 43.3% are closer to IMAX Digital ratio. Considering the number of theatres they don't have info on, the difference might actually be within the margin of error - so it's probably best to assume they're roughly even, with maybe a slight edge to full-frame ratios.

It might be worth noting that of the screens closer to full frame height, a whopping 65.5% are only equipped to show 2K IMAX Digital. Only 32.2% are equipped for film projection, and many of those also have digital equipment. The number of laser locations, obviously, is tiny at the moment.

Projection-wise regardless of size or ratio, 79.7% are ONLY equipped for 2K digital projection, 15.8% are equipped for both digital and film, 1.9% are solely laser, and 1.3% each are equipped either only for film or for film and laser. Or to state it with the overlaps:

IMAX Film Equipped: 18.4%
IMAX Laser Equipped: 3.2%
IMAX Digital Equipped: 95.5%

[Geoff D]

^ And that's the kicker, ladies and gentleman. Even if there ARE more 'full frame' IMAX screens than not - though I'd expect the North American census to be weighted towards the former given the historic association with the format - virtually two thirds of the 'true' screens are only equipped to show 1.90 2K digital anyway, to say nothing of the 80% weighting for 2K digital only across all US IMAX screens.

It's as I said above: the legacy 1.43 screens are there, but IMAX are stiffing them with 2K 1.90 projection anyway. It's so sad that their requirement for a legacy laser install is for screens above 80ft in height.

[dvdmike]

Why does the ratio matter when they are moving to shooting digital

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Why does the ratio matter when they are moving to shooting digital

wouldn't it matter for those theaters that have 4:3 screens?